Date: Fri, 03 Jan 1997 15:12:36 -0800 From: Paul Traina <pst@shockwave.com> To: proff@suburbia.net Cc: phk@critter.dk.tfs.com, jkh@freebsd.org, current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: utmp changes Message-ID: <199701032312.PAA24528@precipice.shockwave.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 04 Jan 1997 08:57:38 %2B1100." <19970103215738.24314.qmail@suburbia.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Agreed, 100%. Unfortunately, we're also stuck with the fact that it's an API of a sick and twisted sort (if we weren't, we wouldn't be in the mess we're in today). I think the right thing(tm) to do is to toss together an extensible formal API to the "session database" and see if we can get the BSD and linux folks to agree to it. Then, it doesn't matter how we actually implement it. Of course, getting people to agree to squat these days is damn near impossible.(Which is why I was being conservative and just stealing from Linux and BSD). Sigh. . From: proff@suburbia.net Subject: Re: utmp changes > From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.dk.tfs.com> > Subject: Re: utmp changes > > No what I wanted was a space for the key-name for ssh and a flag for the > fact that the session is encrypted. [..] The whole utmp idea is stupid dreadful hack. session-info-fs anyone?
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199701032312.PAA24528>